4 ms·
If were going down the calling silly route, I'd rather categorize handwaving of Rusts additional complexities by their community as silly. If "everything has a
by hu3 2y ago
If were going down the calling silly route, I'd rather categorize handwaving of Rusts additional complexities by their community as silly.
If "everything has a cost" anyway we might as well code is assembly for optimal performance. But no, because nuances and differences of cognitive load during development can be significant. And so does compilation speed.
It's arguably much easier to code with a GC and language adoption reflects that.
- cesarb 2y ago> I'd rather categorize handwaving of Rusts additional complexities by their community as silly. I believe what steveklabnik meant, was that all this extra complexity (the borrow checker) already exists in the language for other reasons. It's not an additional cost to the compiler or the developer when using the reference-counted types (Rc or Arc).
- steveklabnik 2y agoThat's correct. I thought we were talking specifically about refcount traffic, not about broader issues.